list_subtitles_info

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it is an HTTP GET and that it applies Guessit, but it does not disclose behavior with invalid filenames, error conditions, or the structure of the returned info beyond what the output schema presumably provides.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loaded with the core action, followed by the endpoint and argument. It wastes no words, though the 'GET /api/subtitles/info' line is somewhat redundant with the tool's purpose but still useful context.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple, read-only tool with a single optional parameter and an output schema present, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It does not mention whether filenames is required (though schema shows default null), nor does it explain what happens with an empty or null value. The tool is not complex, so a 3 reflects the minimal viable level.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only says 'filenames: Subtitles filenames', which adds minimal meaning over the parameter name. It does not clarify that this is expected to be a list of filename strings, whether null is valid, or any constraints (e.g., max count, format). The description gives an agent little beyond the schema itself.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Guessit over subtitles filename') and the resource (subtitle filenames), and includes the HTTP endpoint. It is distinguishable from siblings like list_subtitles and list_subtitles_contents by the 'Guessit' action and 'info' in the name, though it does not explicitly name the alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_subtitles or list_subtitles_contents. The description does not mention conditions, exclusions, or preferred scenarios, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.